Media Bias:Jewish vs. Christian

On Thursday, August 17, 2000, the New York Times had 14 articles on "Christian", but almost twice as many, 27, on "Jewish".  Christians are 86% of the population and jews are only 1.9%, though, which by itself, before considering the quality and content of the articles, shows that news coverage of "jewish" is per capita 87 times greater than news coverage of "Christian"

	The 1.9% of the US population who are jews own Three Quarters of mainstream media.
	The 0.2% of Sweden's population who are jews own 85% of the mainstream media.
	The components of mass hysteria.
	Only one third believe US media is not biased.
	John Leo on media bias.
	The ignorant mediots who write the news.
	Robert Countess:  NPR should be "National Public jew Radio".
	Dahr Jamail reports on media bias in Iraq.
	Rupert Murdoch, jew.
	Media Research Center on media bias.

That tells only a small part of the story, though.   Pick any article about Christians, and you will always find a back handed insult of Christians, such as "many of those from the Christian right looked past their differences with the moderate wing of the party" whereas coverage of jews NEVER includes things like "many of those from the Jewish left looked past their differences with the moderate wing of the party".  Instead, articles about jews say things like "And we've done what Jews have done through the centuries -- taken something from their surrounding community and wed it with something from their heritage, and given that to the world."

Are they referring to the holocaust hoax which has cost this country more than $132 billion in "aid" to Israel, more than $33,000 per man, woman, and child in Israel?

Comparing the number of mainstream media articles (represented by articles in the Los Angeles Times between January and September 1999) to public interest (represented by the number of web pages indexed by Alta Vista) regarding thirty two key issues highlights the wide gulf between the interests of "we the people" and the chronic bias by our mainstream press.

The number of Alta Vista articles on the Fathers' Manifesto exceeded the number on feminists by three times, the number on NOW by fifty five times, the number on gun control by three times, the number on "child support" by 50%, the number on Janet Reno by five times, and the number on TIMSS by six times, and is equal to the number of articles on affirmative action, domestic violence, and child abuse.  But during this time, there were no articles in the LA Times on the Fathers' Manifesto, only one on TIMSS, and only 2 on SAT Math, versus 122,000, 22,180, and 622,740 respectively on Alta Vista.

The media's feeding frenzy in coverage of school shootings is not supported by the relatively low level of public interest, considering that the percent of articles in the Los Angeles Times was 141 times higher than the percent of articles indexed by Alta Vista, and that Alta Vista contained fifty four times as many articles on the Fathers' Manifesto than on school shootings.  The Los Angeles Times also devoted an inordinate amout of writing to girls' soccer, 23 times greater than Alta Vista. The public doesn't agree with the media regarding a number of other issues which the media considers to be much more important--NOW received 20 times as much media coverage, deadbeat dad received 16 times, gun control 13 times, Oklahoma City Bombing 13 times, Janet Reno 11 times, spousal abuse and feminists 9 times, domestic violence 4 times, women's movement and child abuse and child support 3 times, and Jewish and illegitimacy two times. But on issues which the public is more interested in, and which we consider to be vital social issues and problems, like morality, prayer, Jesus Christ, Waco, Fathers' Day, and the Bible, there were as few as one third as many media articles as Alta Vista articles.  And on education issues, like ACT, SAT Math, and TIMSS scores, public interest was ten to one hundred times greater than the number of mainstream media articles.

Relative to articles about Jesus Christ, the percent of articles on school shootings in the Los Angeles times exceeded the percent on Alta Vista by 316 times.  Similarly, the LA Times had 52 times as many articles on girls' soccer, 45 times on NOW, 36 times on deadbeat dads, 30 times on gun control, 29 times on the Oklahoma City bombing, 25 times on Janet Reno, 21 times on spousal abuse, 20 times on feminists, 9 times on domestic violence, 7 times on the women's movement, 6 times on child abuse and "child support", 5 times on Jewish, and 3 times on illegitimacy.  

Where does the media get its marching orders?   How can it afford to provide so much coverage of issues which its readers aren't interested in, while not providing coverage which their readers are interested in?   Why is the mainstream media so dedicated to feminism, NOW, girls' soccer, school shootings, gun control, Janet Reno and spousal abuse, and so uninterested in Jesus Christ, the Bible, morality, prayer, Waco, Honor Codes, and education?  How much business do newspapers lose by being so out of touch with their readers?  Who pays them to ignore common business sense, and instead continue to pound their destructive message into our thick skulls?  Why do they proselytize about feminism and denigrate Christianity when less than 2% of the population is feminists and more than 85% are Christians?  What do they have to gain by this?  How can they benefit by sacrificing profits in favor of ideology?

The other sign of their chronic bias, which doesn't even appear on the following chart, is that most if not all of their coverage of issues like affirmative action and feminism is positive while most of the articles on Alta Vista are extremely negative, whereas most of their coverage of Christianity is negative and most of the articles on Alta Vista are positive.

Freedom of the press is one thing.  Using that freedom of the press to destroy the Constitution which guarantees that freedom, and in particular to undermine free exercise of religion, which is in the exact same First Amendment which free speech is in, is another matter.

If the Senate doesn't investigate this problem and curtail it immediately, then it should allocate funding which enables a competing media to present equal media coverage of issues which counteract this bias.

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party